NVIDIA Quadro K5200 vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700M
We compared two Professional market GPUs: 8GB VRAM Quadro K5200 and 512MB VRAM Quadro FX 2700M to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
NVIDIA Quadro K5200 's Advantages
Released 5 years and 11 months late
Boost Clock771MHz
More VRAM (8GB vs 512GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (192.3GB/s vs 51.14GB/s)
2256 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (65W vs 150W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
Quadro K5200
+2697%
3.553 TFLOPS
Quadro FX 2700M
0.127 TFLOPS
Graphics Card
Jul 2014
Release Date
Aug 2008
Quadro
Generation
Quadro FX Mobile
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
MXM-HE
Clock Speeds
667 MHz
Base Clock
-
771 MHz
Boost Clock
-
1502 MHz
Memory Clock
799 MHz
Memory
8GB
Memory Size
512MB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR3
256bit
Memory Bus
256bit
192.3GB/s
Bandwidth
51.14GB/s
Render Config
-
-
-
-
SM Count
6
2304
Shading Units
48
192
TMUs
24
48
ROPs
16
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
L2 Cache
64 KB
-
-
-
Theoretical Performance
37.01 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
8.480 GPixel/s
148.0 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
12.72 GTexel/s
-
-
-
3.553 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
127.2 GFLOPS
148.0 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
-
Board Design
150W
TDP
65W
450 W
Suggested PSU
-
2x DVI
2x DisplayPort 1.2
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin
Power Connectors
-
Graphics Processor
GK110B
GPU Name
G94
-
GPU Variant
NB9E-GLM2
Kepler
Architecture
Tesla
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
28 nm
Process Size
65 nm
7.08 billion
Transistors
0.505 billion
561 mm²
Die Size
240 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (11_1)
DirectX
11.1 (10_0)
4.6
OpenGL
3.3
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
1.1
Vulkan
N/A
3.5
CUDA
1.1
5.1
Shader Model
4.0
